Opinion: State senate candidate Koch shared climate change views
September 12, 2024 | By Donald Koch Those of us who live in Central Vermont know for sure that climate change is happening. Just look at the flooding that has taken place in Barre, Montpelier, Plainfield, Waterbury and the appropriately named “Mad River” Valley! Flooding that in some places exceeded the 500-year flood districts—and all in the two years since our last elections!
Numerous “emergencies” have been declared, but what has our legislature done in response? Mostly, they’ve agreed to subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles to lower our carbon footprint. But how does that really help those whose homes have been flooded?
The Democrat supermajority in Montpelier is infatuated with the idea that climate change is caused entirely by human behavior—namely, by the discharge of greenhouse gases—and that if Vermont can reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, it can stop climate change and lead the rest of the nation in doing so as well. Thus, they have passed the “Global Warming Solutions Act,” mandating measurable reductions in Vermont’s carbon emissions, authorizing anybody at all to sue the state if we do not meet those mandates, and suggesting, in fact, that li’l ol’ Vermont has the “solution” to global warming.
Now, they have followed up with the so-called “Affordable Heat Act,” which establishes a complex system of “tradeable credits” designed to raise the price of fossil-based heating fuels, and use the money from sale of these credits to insulate homes for low-income people, install heat pumps, and in other ways convert Vermont’s heating system to methods that the legislature, in its unquestionable wisdom, has decided are good for the people.
Having ordained from on high what is good for us, the legislature now has to figure out exactly what it is that they have created, so they have farmed out the task to a consulting firm called NV5. NV5 issued a preliminary report in August estimating the cost of implementing a program such as this at $17.3 billion between 2026 and 2050, paid for by adding more than $3 per gallon to the price of heating fuel such as oil, propane, natural gas and kerosene!
But wait! That was only a preliminary report. The final report was issued last week, and the new cost is “only” $9.6 billion, resulting in a cost increase of $4.03 per gallon of #2 fuel oil! Pardon me if I ask how one can show a cost reduction of 46% between an August preliminary report and a final report in September? And how does a reduced total cost result in an increased cost per gallon? Is there a slight “error” in here someplace? How reliable can such a report be? Is it a report that we can safely and reliably use to create one of the largest and most significant programs this state has ever known (and the first one of its kind in the country?) And what does that program actually look like, since the report estimates its cost but doesn’t say anything about its actual design?
So I say STOP! There is one more vote to be taken before this takes effect! Now that we have some estimates—reliable or otherwise—of the total cost of this “affordable” package, the legislature has to vote one more time on whether to “pull the trigger” to set the plan in action. This vote will probably take place early in the coming legislative session, and every candidate for the legislature should be asked whether he or she will vote YES or NO to authorize the Affordable
Heat Act to go forward. Let me be clear: IF I AM ELECTED TO THE SENATE, I WILL VOTE NO!
Here's what I think Vermont should do about climate change:
First, amend the Global Warming Solutions Act to change the mandates back to goals.
Second, eliminate the extremely foolish provision that allows any person off the street to sue the state of Vermont for not meeting the mandates/goals.
Third, kill the Affordable Heat Act—it’s anything but affordable, and when you think that #2 heating oil sells for about $3.85 a gallon now and that adding another $4 to it brings the price to $7.85 per gallon, I can easily see more Vermonters packing up and heading to Florida.
Fourth, recognize that Vermont cannot stop or reverse climate change, but we can deal with its effects. We can buy out areas that have flooded repeatedly; we can dredge waterways in places where it is appropriate; we can assist with making existing buildings flood-resistant; and we can regulate, or perhaps even prohibit, construction of new buildings in flood-prone areas.
In short, what money we have, whether from FEMA or otherwise, should be used to help Vermonters deal with the inevitable consequences of climate change and not for the purpose of leading the nation in some “mission impossible.”
Donald Koch
Barre resident Donald Koch is a Republican candidate for the Washington state Senate district.